Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 30, 2025
Monitoring PD-1-Blocking Antibodies Bound to T Cells Derived from a Drop of Peripheral Blood
Published on: February 5, 2020
Risk of Infection with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Fausto Petrelli1, Anna Maria Morelli2, Andrea Luciani1
1Oncology Unit, ASST Bergamo Ovest, Treviglio, BG, Italy.
Background:
The relative risk (RR) of infection for patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is unknown.
Objectives:
This study evaluated the risk of infection for patients with solid tumors undergoing ICI therapy based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Patients And Methods:
The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Pubmed databases were searched up to 1 December 2020. Randomized trials comparing any ICI alone, with chemotherapy (CT), or with other agents versus placebo, CT, or other agents were included. Three independent reviewers extracted the data. The primary outcome was the RR of all-grade (G) and G3-5 infections for patients receiving ICI-based treatments. Random or fixed-effect models were used according to statistical heterogeneity.
Results:
A total of 21,451 patients from N = 36 studies were eligible. ICIs were associated with a similar risk of all-grade infections (RR = 1.02; 95% CI 0.84-1.24; P = 0.85) versus non-ICI treatments (G1-5 events: 9.6 versus 8.3%). When the ICIs alone were compared to CT, their use was associated with 42% less risk of all-grade infections (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.4-0.85; P = 0.01). Compared to CT, the combination of ICIs and CT increased the risk of all-grade (RR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.23-1.53; P < 0.01) and severe infections (RR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.17-1.96; P < 0.01). In anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, anti-CTLA-4, monotherapy, and combination trials, the RR of all-grade infections was 0.72 (95% CI 0.49-1.05; P = 0.09), 1.18 (95% CI 0.95-1.46; P = 0.13), 1.74 (95% CI 1.13-2.67; P = 0.01), 0.97 (95% CI 0.79-1.19; P = 0.75) and 2.26 (95% CI 1.34-3.8; P < 0.01), respectively.
Conclusions:
Compared to CT alone, ICIs were safer and are recommended for frail patients. Conversely, CT + ICIs or ICIs combinations increased infection risk. Further studies are required to identify high-risk patients and evaluate the need for CT dose reduction or prophylactic myeloid growth factors.
More Related Videos
13:37A Mouse Tumor Model of Surgical Stress to Explore the Mechanisms of Postoperative Immunosuppression and Evaluate Novel Perioperative Immunotherapies
Published on: March 12, 2014
09:12High-Throughput Automated Multiplex Immunofluorescence Assays for Translational Research
Published on: June 10, 2025
Related Concept Videos
01:26Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:22Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
01:27Tumor Immunotherapy
01:26Healthcare Associated Infections I: Iatrogenic, Exogenic and Endogenic
HAIs significantly increase the cost of health care. Extended stays in healthcare institutions, increased disability, increased costs of medications, including specialized antibiotics, and prolonged recovery times add to the patient's expenses and the healthcare institution and funding bodies.